- 8 - within the State of California." Significantly, the court did not limit relief to employees of State Farm. The court found State Farm liable under title VII to women who were "denied recruitment, selection and/or hire as trainee agents". Petitioners' alternative argument is that, because there is no evidence in the settlement agreement that State Farm intended to award backpay or any other pay, petitioner's claim was based upon tort or tort type rights. Although the settlement agreement does not contain a specific reference to title VII, the surrounding circumstances convince us that, pursuant to the settlement agreement, the State Farm payment was made to settle a claim under title VII. Petitioner was a claimant in a class action suit that alleged discrimination under title VII and sought backpay and injunctive and declaratory relief. The District Court ruled that State Farm was liable under title VII to all members of the class who had been discriminated against and ordered individual hearings. Although petitioner did not have a hearing to determine whether she was entitled to damages, petitioner and State Farm entered into a settlement agreement pursuant to which State Farm paid $75,000 to petitioner for petitioner's release of a claim "arising out of or relating to any alleged discriminatory, improper, or unlawful act or omission of State Farm in connection with * * * recruitment, selection, hiring, job assignment, job transfer, training, promotion, or termination". Additionally,Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011